Destroyer (2018)

Featured

p15839499_p_v8_aa

17 years after a bank robbery gone wrong, an alcoholic, ethically-compromised LAPD officer tracks down the man who orchestrated the crime. As she does so, we learn about her relationship with her partner while she was undercover. We learn about her relationship with her daughter in the present. And, most importantly, we learn that when she sets her mind on something, nothing will stop her; not bullets, not bruises, not anything. Continue reading

Advertisements

Following

Greetings Loved Ones! Liu Is The Name, And Views Are My Game.

I’ve always been a fan of watching famous director’s early films. Partly because it humanizes them–they didn’t always have huge budgets and A-list actors at their disposal– but also because it shows how much, or how little, they’ve changed over the years. Sometimes, like with Martin Scorsese’s The Big Shave, there’s nothing in these early works that indicates who made them. Other times, as with the subject of today’s review, Christopher Nolan’s Following, it is extremely apparent who helmed these pictures, and that these filmmakers haven’t changed their style or subject matter that much over the years.

The story of a struggling writer who begins stalking people, ostensibly for inspiration, Following possesses many of Nolan’s trademark characteristics, including philosophical dialogue, non-linear narratives, morally ambiguous characters, and examinations of memory and perception. It also has a few moments that unintentionally predict the future. In one scene, for instance, the main character and his friend break into a house that has the Batman logo on the front door. They never comment on it, but the logo is extremely visible in the background throughout the entire scene, almost as though Nolan knew, back in 1998, that he would direct arguably the greatest series of Batman films a mere seven years later.

But beyond the simple novelty of it being a now famous directors early work, Following does stand on its own as an effective thriller. For starters ,the acting is very good. Everyone has energy. Everyone has passion. You can really tell that these performers are giving it their all. It’s even more impressive when you consider that none of the cast were professionals, and that they made this film for $6,000 while still working day-jobs. The pacing is also quite good. This is a quick, lean picture, with a running time of just about 70 minutes. Some people might think that’s too short, but, honestly, I believe movies should only go on for as long as they need to, and Following didn’t need to be any longer than it is. And, finally, the film looks really good. It’s entirely in black and white, which, apparently, was done as a cost-cutting measure, but it actually fits the genre and tone of the film. It helps bring to life the seety, noir-ish world that Nolan is trying to create, and I quite liked the way everything looked.

So if you want to see a small, well-crafted thriller, which just so happens to be made by a now famous director, give Following a look. I guarantee you’ll have a good time.

Bronson: So Who Says Prison Can’t Be An Enjoyable Experience?

Greetings Loved Ones! Liu Is The Name, And Views Are My Game.

With it’s bizarre visuals, odd, non-linear narrative structure, and hard to pin-point characters, it is very difficult to say for certain what kind of a film Bronson is. It’s about a real person, but it’s not a documentary. It’s main character is an extremely violent individual, and yet very little blood is seen throughout the movie. It’s set up like a morality tale, and yet absolutely no morals are imparted in it. In fact, the film becomes so absurd in some scenes, like the one where the main character kidnaps his art teacher, paints himself black and then puts an apple in the hostage’s mouth, that one starts to wonder if it’s really worth continuing with this rubbish. I will say this, though. For all it’s confusing features, Nicolas Winding Refn’s Bronson is still a highly enjoyable, highly original audio-visual experience. I’d heard various critics describe it as “A Clockwork Orange for the 21st century,” and now, having seen it for myself, I can understand why they’d say that.

For those of you who don’t recognize this picture, Bronson is a 2008 fictionalized biographical drama directed by Nicolas Winding Refn and starring
Tom Hardy. It tells the story of Michael Peterson (aka Charlie Bronson), a convicted felon who has earned a notorious reputation as Britain’s most violent prisoner. I’d never heard of him beforehand, but now, having learned something of his various escapades, I can understand why he might be thought of that way.

The film is set up in a rather unusual manner. It presents several assorted points from Bronson’s life, intercut with him on stage before an audience in several stages of performance make-up, and speaking directly to camera while seemingly behind bars. Like A Clockwork Orange, the film juxtaposes highly intense, violent imagery with gentle, classical-sounding audio. You’re constantly reminded that what you’re watching is a movie, and never led to believe that any of what’s happening is real. In fact, were it not for the tagline, “based on a true story,” and my own research into Charlie Bronson’s existence, I would have sworn to you that this film was pure fiction. And you know what, I actually feel like that worked to the movie’s advantage. Most biopics try extremely hard to make themselves believable, and in so doing, set themselves up for criticism when they inevitably portray events or people inaccurately. Bronson, by contrast, exults in the fact that it is fiction by being extremely outrageous, which is actually quite fitting, since it is telling the story of an extremely outrageous man. Likewise, the movie’s lack of a moral center makes it more enjoyable. With it’s prison setting, violent main character, and classification as “A Clockwork Orange for the 21st century,” one might be led to believe that Bronson is a searing condemnation of society’s attempts to get everyone to conform to a certain behavioral standard by breaking the human spirit. And I will admit, there were several points in the story where I felt as though the movie was going down that path–like the scene where a fellow inmate says, “You’re no more mad than I am, and that scares them,” and the fact that the final shot shows a weak and wounded Bronson standing in a phone-booth sized cell–but the film never falls pray to the “look for the hidden meaning” monster. No one in the film ever tries to “change” Bronson, at least, not in the way that they tried to change Alex in A Clockwork Orange or McMurphy in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The main character never seems disheartened by his situation. If anything, he seems to rather like it. He declares, numerous times throughout the film, his absolute love for prison, likening it to a hotel room, and even going so far as to strangle a sympathetic asylum inmate in order to ensure his return there. If there is a message to be taken from this film, it is that some people are just crazy, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

So, is Bronson really worth taking the time to watch? Absolutely! From it’s unique cinematography, to it’s enthralling soundtrack, to its self-aware absurdity and odd narrative voice, Bronson is a highly unique audio-visual experience that’s extremely enjoyable. Even if you don’t like prison movies or actors like Tom Hardy, this film is still a triumph, and on many levels. Some other critics might beg to differ, but I would go so far as to give this film an 8 out of 10. Hands down, one of the best pictures I’ve seen this year.